Progress Report & Life’s Observation

(Caveat: Heavy stuff – read at your own peril, I had a long day)

I honestly not sure whether she really read the draft that I’d submitted yesterday or just glanced through it since today she said, “Ok la dah ni…” and even wrote ‘good’ in the margin of one part of the paper. Seriously (bukan masuk bakul angkat sendiri), I’m still considering this paper as one of the early drafts, as there are more additions/corrections to be made. Bear in mind, she had said not that long ago something about this paper being my-own-paper (no more co-authored with her; refer Appendix A.1) and she’s already tired of the issue and wanting to move on to the next one. This is where the confusion starts.

My dissertation is actually a series of 3 inter-related essays. First paper is the one already completed (and presented in an international conference – January 2006, in KL je) but sadly, rejected by The Journal. We used aggregated data from the 1990s. Let us call this as Essay I.
Next essay is the one that I presented in November 2006 which covers another (related) issue using recent data from 2000-2003 (got it at the late stage, mid of last year).

Alhamdulillah - I got it confirmed today that 2004 data won’t be released (sound like bad news?) until the end of this year. So, I’m saved from the need to re-run my analysis provided I manage to submit the thesis before then. Yeah, it is 2007 - I know (otherwise you’ll be checking what year we’re in now). But that’s the thing with bureaucracy. I’m (read: we) lucky enough to get my hand on the data since no one else (either individual or organization, local or foreign) has it – my so called trump card! How come we have it when nobody has it? That’s another long story which I better not delve into right now, confidentiality acts and all that.

Since The Journal’s editor & (blind) reviewer strongly recommended that I use disaggregated data for the analysis in Essay I (of which I have only partial disaggregated data), so I wrote the current paper which actually used recent disaggregated data but retaining the issue and methodology used in Essay I. However, I did try my best to approach it from another angle and to sound convincing enough.

According to her, current essay is Essay II as she’s not sure where the November paper is heading to (meaning major revision coming up next). But I’m sure I’ve already written three essays. So, the current one must be Essay III right? Does it matter which is which as long as I’ve all three? After all, it is a matter of semantic je kan…

So, these are the things that I must do ASAP:
1. Finalize current paper (think of where to present & get it publish if possible).
2. Revise November paper (try to submit to The Journal as advised).
3. Write an introductory-comprehensive chapter to link all three essays.
4. Compile all three into an urgently needed thesis for submission. Conform to technical standards as prescribed by the Graduate School.
5. Get endorsement from all committee members.
6. Translation (enough said on this).

P/s: At the same time, we are trying to salvage Essay I by sending it to another journal after much editing & rewriting. Contracting-out is possible in the case of 4 and 5, except that $$ (commodity which is recognized as almost extinct after May 2007) goes ka-ching big time!!!

Appendix A.1
Co-authored means I wrote the stuff, she heavily edited it. She came up with the ‘initial ideas/issues’ and paid for a major portion of the data costs while I laboured from ‘data to tables of results’ analysis. I use the paper as part of my thesis, she is using it as her published research. Fair deal.

Life’s Observation 1:
Reading an academic paper does not hold the same wonder and appreciation as reading many blogs one after another, day after day. The same things can be said about writing a simple paper which needs lots of motivation compared to writing a long blog entry.

Life’s Observation 2:
Always remember- What is in it for me?
This paper is mine, 100% mine. So, she’s not really interested in it?
Another example: I was nicely asked early in the morning to collect her data from Putrajaya – ala courier guy or dispatch-rider. No problem at all since she paid for it. When she offered some money to pay for my petrol & precious time, I declined. Silly, don’t you think? But I’m keeping a soft copy of the precious data (for future use) with her permission. That’s what we called payment-in-kind. There’s no such thing as free lunch after all.

Life’s Observation 3:
Publish or perish! (academicians’ totem)
Which comes first? Publication/Seminar participation/Submission for thesis examination?